REVATHY W/O. SARAVANA KUMAR Vs. BALASUBRAMANIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal suit is directed against the judgment and decree dated 22.05.2006, passed in O.S.No.25 of 2005. The suit was instituted by the appellant for partition. The appellant/plaintiff is the daughter-in-law of the respondents 1 and 2 and respondents 3 and 4 are sons of the respondents 1 and

(2.) The deceased husband of the appellant/plaintiff Mr.Saravana kumar is also the son of respondents 1 and 2 and after his death, the appellant instituted a suit for partition claiming share in respect of the suit schedule property. The relationship between the parties are not disputed.

(3.) The contentions of the appellant/plaintiff are disputed and denied by the respondents and in the written statement they have denied the allegations by stating that the suit schedule properties are the self acquired properties of the respondents 1 and 2 and the deceased son of the respondents 1 and 2 had never earned such a huge amount so as to invest the same for purchase of suit schedule properties. This apart, the suit schedule properties are not joint family properties and it is self acquired and therefore, the appellant cannot claim any right over the property. Further it was contended that, the defendants 1 and 2 instituted a suit in O.S.No.472/2005 for the relief of permanent injunction on the file of the District Munsif Court, Salem and in the said suit, a memo was filed and a sum of Rs.2,55,000/- was settled on 31.05.2005. The appellant also admitted the memo and further he made an endorsement that she will not claim any right over the suit property. At the outset, in lieu of the O.S.No.472/2005, the appellant had received a sum of Rs.2,55,000/- from the respondents 1 and 2 and agreed that she will not proceed further in respect of the suit schedule property.